Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v TN Harris – Decision dated 10 July 2014

hearingid: 4205e50ddbedc22cb45d696d95285c46

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype:

startdate: no date provided

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: 03/07/2014

hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v TN Harris - Decision dated 10 July 2014

charge:

facts:

appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v Mr T Harris

Rules: 638(1) (c)

BEFORE THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY

UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003

HELD AT TE RAPA RACECOURSE

IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Racing

BETWEEN Mr J Oatham – Senior Stipendiary Steward (RIU)

Informant

AND Mr T Harris – Class D Rider

Defendant

Information No: A6580

Venue: Te Rapa Racecourse

Judicial Committee: Mr A Dooley, Chairman – R Seabrook, Committee

Appearing: Mr J Oatham – Senior Stipendiary Steward

Mr M Williamson – Stipendiary Steward

Mr T Harris – Class D Rider

Registrar: Mr M Williamson – Stipendiary Steward

Plea: Admitted

Date of Hearing: 9 July 2014

Date of Decision: 10 July 2014

Charge

THAT on Wednesday 18 June 2014 at the race meeting of the Te Aroha Jockey Club held at the Te Aroha Racecourse when riding the horse MONI NUI in Race 2 the Oulaghan Racing Open Hurdles YOU DID ride in an improper manner when intentionally directing your mount inwards forcing DANCING DIAMOND inwards across the heels of REAL TREASURE near the 1800 metres an alleged breach of Rule 638(1)(c) AND THAT you are thereby liable to any penalty or penalties that may be imposed upon you pursuant to Rule 803(1).

Mr Harris acknowledged that he understood the nature of the charge, the Rule and admitted the breach.

This hearing took place at Te Rapa racecourse due to the abandonment of the Te Aroha race meeting on July 9.

Mr Oatham produced a letter from Mr Godber, General Manager RIU, authorising to lodge this Information.

Rule 638(1) (c) provides: A Rider shall not ride a horse in a manner which the Judicial Committee considers to be improper

803 (1) A person who, or body or other entity which, commits or is deemed to have committed a breach of these Rules or any of them for which a penalty is not provided elsewhere in these Rules shall be liable to:

(a) be disqualified for a period not exceeding 12 months; and/or

(b) be suspended from holding or obtaining a Licence for a period not exceeding 12 months.

If a Licence is renewed during a term of suspension, then the suspension shall continue to apply to the renewed Licence; and/or

(c) a fine not exceeding $20,000.

Where a Rule or any part of a Rule provides that the or a horse may be disqualified if a person commits a breach in respect of such Rule or any such part the liability to disqualification of the horse shall not be regarded as a penalty for the person’s or body’s or other entity’s breach of the Rule or of the part.

Evidence for the Informant

Mr Williamson demonstrated on the head on film which showed at the 2,000 metre mark DANCING DIAMOND racing in a 2 wide position with MONI NUI racing directly on its outside. At this stage REAL TREASURE was racing 3 to 4 lengths ahead of these runners. He pointed out to the Committee just prior to the turn out of the home straight Mr Harris riding his mount forward and angling MONI NUI inwards which forced DANCING DIAMOND to be placed against the running rail.

Mr Williamson said the concerns to the Stewards was Mr Harris lifted his right arm away from his body making contact with DANCING DIAMOND. This was demonstrated by using the close up Trackside video footage.

Mr Williamson then demonstrated on the side–on film that Mr Harris was riding his mount forward and inwards when only a neck in advance of DANCING DIAMOND. He added that if both runners had maintained their rightful line of running DANCING DIAMOND would have finished on the outside of REAL TREASURE.

Evidence for the Respondent

Mr Harris told the Committee that prior to the incident occurring DANCING DIAMOND had made contact with MONI NUI’S hind quarters which resulted in his mount been turned inwards. Mr Harris conceded shortly after that point he moved in slightly making contact with DANCING DIAMOND on his inside. He said this resulted in him losing balance and there was no intent on his part to elbow DANCING DIAMOND.

In response to a question from the Committee, Mr Oatham conceded that if it had not been for the extended elbow movement this breach would have been a charge of careless riding.

In response to a further question from the Committee, Mr Harris said his actions were a “spur of the moment response” and not for safety reasons.

Decision

As Mr Harris admitted the breach we find the charge proved.

Submissions as to Penalty

Mr Oatham submitted that a charge of improper riding was rarely used and noted only 1 previous breach of this Rule which occurred in March 2010. It was the Stewards view the 2010 breach was the closet comparison for the Committee to consider.

Mr Oatham produced a listing of offences under the old Rule which dated back to 1998. Those penalties for improper riding showed 3 and 4 day suspensions were the consistent penalty imposed.

Mr Oatham in summing up the incident conceded that DANCING DIAMOND was over racing however he said there was enough room had Mr Harris not moved inwards. He added that there was some mitigating factors in that the incident occurred on the point of the turn. However, Mr Oatham told the Committee it was clear Mr Harris’s arm did extend away from his body into DANCING DIAMOND.

Mr Oatham said although “it was in the heat of the moment” he believed there was intent when Mr Harris’s extended his elbow.

Mr Oatham submitted there needs to be a deterrent factor in the penalty but the Committee should be mindful that jump riders level of opportunities are reasonably infrequent. He said Mr Harris admitted the breach and was fully co-operative with the Stewards during their investigation. He said the breach occurred in a $20,000 race and submitted a 3 weeks suspension would be appropriate.

Mr Harris asked the Committee if they would consider a combination of a fine and suspension.

Mr Harris advised that he had upcoming commitments at Wellington on 12 July, and sought a deferment to any proposed suspension.

In response to a question form the Committee, Mr Harris submitted he was intending to ride at the Grand National meeting in August.

Mr Oatham had no objection to Mr Harris’s submission of a fine and suspension.

Reasons for Penalty

The Committee carefully considered all the evidence and submissions presented. The mitigating factors are Mr Harris’s admission of the breach, the fact DANCING DIAMOND was over racing during the running of the race and his clear record under this Rule.

The Committee is mindful of the restricted riding opportunities available to jumping riders throughout the season. This is supported by the appeal decision RIU v Mr P - May 2013.

In determining an appropriate penalty the Committee was of the view the delay in today’s hearing, from the date of this breach, should not impact on Mr Harris’s opportunity to ride at the Grand National Carnival in early August. In addition to this and when considering penalty the Committee did not believe the level of improper riding displayed by Mr Harris warrants him losing that opportunity. Although it must be stated we do not condone this type of riding.

In relation to the breach of this Rule (March 2010) which Mr Oatham submitted was the most reasonable comparison it is the opinion of this Committee that particular breach was of a more serious nature as the buffeting went on for 200 metres. Mr Oatham produced the March 2010 report to Mr Harris and the Committee.

We are satisfied after reviewing the 4 different video angles that Mr Harris’s right elbow was extended out and made contact with DANCING DIAMOND’S neck region for approximately 2 strides. This is a clear aggravating fact. The films also show that Mr Harris did angle his mount inwards into the rightful running line of DANCING DIAMOND moving that horse in 1 horse width when not sufficiently clear.

The Committee referred to the JCA Penalty Guide which recommends a starting point for this Rule is 6 weeks. The Penalty Guide does allow Judicial Committee’s to impose a fine and suspension for riders with limited riding opportunities. The JCA listing of penalties confirms that improper riding is an extremely rare breach.

The Committee is mindful of the necessity of a deterrent element when imposing penalty.

After taking into account all the above factors we consider the appropriate penalty to be a fine and a suspension having regard for Mr Harris’s limited riding opportunities.

Penalty

We grant Mr Harris’s request to seek a deferment to his suspension as per Rule 1106(2).

Accordingly, we impose a suspension on Mr Harris which will commence after racing on 12 July and conclude after racing on 1 August (4 Days).

This penalty equates to 3 weeks and encompasses 19 July Te Rapa, 24 July Awapuni, 31 July Waverley and 1 August Avondale.

In addition to that the Committee orders that Mr Harris be fined the sum of $500.

Costs

The RIU sought no costs.

Due to this matter being scheduled to be heard on a raceday there will be no order for JCA costs.

Adrian Dooley                         Richard Seabrook

Chair                                      Committee Member

10 July 2014

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Non-race day

Rules:

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid:

race_expapproval:

racecancelled:

race_noreport:

race_emailed1:

race_emailed2:

race_title:

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid:

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport:

waitingforpublication:

meet_emailed1:

meet_emailed2:

meetdate: no date provided

meet_title:

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation:

meet_racingtype:

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: